Officials: Treaty provides security

Tags:

Text Size

Robert Gates testified along with Hillary Clinton and Michael Mullen.
AP Photo

But Republicans continue to worry that statements made by Russian officials after signing the START agreement could undermine it in the future.

“I am very concerned about the signing statement that the Russians made at the time of signing saying that in case missile defense capabilities were pursued in Europe that they would view that as a violation of the treaty,” Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the ranking Republican of the Senate Armed Services Committee told POLITICO after the hearing. “That concerns me a lot.”

But administration officials said during the hearing that such objections are routine, and have cropped up in similar treaties since the 1960s.

“It’s because we can afford it and they can’t,” said Gates, a Russian studies expert who has been involved in the world of nuclear arms since the beginning of his career. “They don’t want to devote the resources to it so they try to stop us by political means.”

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-N.C.) said he is even more concerned about reductions in the U.S. nuclear arsenal.

“I was surprised that neither Secretary Clinton nor Gates argued with the assumption that America should be at parity with Russia when it comes to nuclear weapons,” DeMint said. “We’re a protector of many and a threat to none. Russia is a threat to many and a protector to none. For us to lower ourselves to their level I think sends the world a wrong signal as far as our role in keeping the peace and stability.”

Gates sought to clarify that the policy of this administration has been the same as the last, and is directed at threats from rogue states such as Iran and North Korea. The U.S. continues the same missile defense policy, not build defenses that would completely render Russian nuclear capabilities useless.

“That in our view as in theirs would be enormously destabilizing not to mention unbelievably expensive,” Gates said.